A recent court ruling in Barcelona has brought a significant development in the case involving Dalas Review and his ex-partner, Anne Reborn. The court has declared void the sentence that previously condemned Anne Reborn, and also nullified the confidentiality contract that Dalas Review had with her. This contract had required Anne Reborn to pay 40,000 euros to Dalas Review for allegedly breaching the terms of their agreement.
The confidentiality contract in question was intended to prevent Anne Reborn from discussing her relationship with Dalas Review publicly. However, the court has now ruled that this contract was void from the start, as it was designed to restrain Anne Reborn’s freedom of expression and prevent her from revealing details about their relationship. The contract had been used to sue Anne Reborn when she decided to speak out about her experiences with Dalas Review, resulting in a previous trial that ordered her to pay 40,000 euros in damages.
However, it appears that this previous trial was not conducted fairly, as Anne Reborn was declared “in rebellion” due to Dalas Review providing incorrect address information, which prevented her from receiving the court summons. As a result, the court’s ruling was made without her presence or defense. The recent verdict has now overturned this decision, declaring that the claim of 40,000 euros is not valid and that the contract itself is void due to lack of guarantees.
Invalid contract and induced error
The court’s ruling is based on the fact that Anne Reborn was not fully aware of what she was signing when she agreed to the confidentiality contract. As a foreigner with limited knowledge of Spanish, she did not fully understand the terms of the contract. The judge has stated that Dalas Review induced Anne Reborn to sign the contract, which was designed to protect his own interests and restrict her freedom of expression. The contract was not signed in a single session, and its purpose was not clearly defined, leading the judge to conclude that it was void from the start.
The ruling has significant implications for the case, as it overturns the previous verdict and declares the confidentiality contract null and void. The decision is a significant blow to Dalas Review, who had sought to use the contract to silence his ex-partner and protect his own reputation. The case highlights the importance of ensuring that contracts are fair, transparent, and signed with full understanding of their terms.